Kennel plans nipped in Pocono Township, owner appeals

A dog trainer wants to be unleashed from a May 28 Pocono Township Zoning Hearing Board decision rejecting use of his 4.4-acre Henryville property for a commercial dog kennel.

Comment

By DAVID PIERCE

poconorecord.com

By DAVID PIERCE

Posted Jul. 7, 2013 at 12:01 AM

By DAVID PIERCE

Posted Jul. 7, 2013 at 12:01 AM

» Social News

A dog trainer wants to be unleashed from a May 28 Pocono Township Zoning Hearing Board decision rejecting use of his 4.4-acre Henryville property for a commercial dog kennel.

Edward Bangiyev's appeal of the zoning board's rejection of his special use application to operate the kennel in the Route 715 commercial zone could be heard in Monroe County Court next month. He sought approval to house and train up to 15 dogs there for competitions, though the board said partner Merab Khiskiadze testified 22 dogs could be housed there occasionally.

Bangiyev began housing several dogs there a couple of years ago, after being falsely advised by a previous township zoning officer it was allowed under the township ordinance, said attorney Joseph McDonald, who represents Bangiyev. Then Bangiyev applied for the special use permit and reduced the kennel population to the six dogs allowed as residential pets.

The zoning board cited noise complaints from neighbors as a major factor in its decision.

"The board finds the testimony of these witnesses was credible and that the barking from the dogs on the subject property is excessive," the zoning board said in its written decision. "Barking can be heard a quarter-mile away from the subject property and it is not limited to daytime, but instead can also be heard at night.

"Although the surrounding neighborhood is a mixed use area, there are a number of residences located in close proximity and the excessive barking noise would change the character of that neighborhood," the board said. "The board finds that the noise associated with the dogs on the subject property creates an adverse impact beyond the impact normally associated with a kennel."

This is because the kennel includes outdoor pens where dogs are trained, in addition to indoor accommodations, the board said.

Bangiyev's appeal calls the written decision "erroneous, arbitrary, capricious, invalid, confiscatory, an abuse of the zoning board's discretion and contrary to law." The residents' noise complaints weren't credible and failed to establish the burden of proof required from objectors in a special use case, he said.

"The board erred in considering speculative and undocumented opinion testimony from residents, most lacking in legal standing regarding projected detrimental impacts of the proposed special use," attorney McDonald wrote.

Khiskiadze testified that the dogs are brought indoors by 6 p.m. each day and couldn't be heard outside the kennel facility.

Bangiyev also objected to the board's finding that applicant witnesses offered conflicting testimony.

The Pocono Township supervisors have entered the case as intervenors in support of the zoning hearing board.